Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

I believe there are still ten states which will not allow it, with three of the most populous states -- California, Texas and New York -- among those which will not permit it under their existing laws.

In reality, most of the major retailers have already said they have no plans to impose such a surcharge. It's not worth losing a lot of sales on items with a 20-50% margin (or more) in order to recoup a 2-3% fee for accepting credit cards. It's the smaller, mom-and-pop retailers which will feel the pressure to do this... but that would also make them even less competitive with the big boxes than they already are.

__________________"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?"-- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

I think this is a non-event. The big boys like Walmart, Target, Exxon and the many restaurant chains will probably not implement and lose the competitive advantage unless they get together (I think that's illegal) and do it at the same time.

Around here many of the small businesses have always charged extra if a credit card was used.

Also, around here, government agencies have always charged a "convenience fee" if a credit card is used while paying taxes, etc.

I use credit cards for the cashback feature and convenience, but I can live without that.

[QUOTE=ziggy29;1277345]I believe there are still ten states which will not allow it, with three of the most populous states -- California, Texas and New York -- among those which will not permit it under their existing laws.

I had read the same thing so I wasn't too worried since I live in Texas. But then on the "local news" yesterday they mention the 4% increase without saying anything about Texas not allowing it. Just more inaccurate, incomplete or mis-information from the media.

In reality, the difference now is that they can advertise a cheaper price for cash purchases...

In many cases, they already could advertise cash discounts. The real difference is now they can choose to call them "credit card surcharges" instead of "cash discounts". That said, because of consumer psychology, I would expect that pretty much every retailer which wants to create different pricing would still prefer to call it a "cash discount" because that sounds a lot more consumer-friendly than "credit card surcharge".

__________________"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?"-- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

Everyone has been paying them, meaning that those using credit cards were getting something that even those not using credit cards were helping to pay for. So the surcharge would reflect at least some change.

I've read some equivocations, in addition to that mentioned above (states where surcharges are not permitted).

I've read folks claiming that the rules require a store charging a surcharge for Visa and Mastercard also charge a surcharge for AMEX if they accept AMEX, and AMEX, not covered by this agreement, doesn't permit a surcharge, thereby prohibiting those retailers from charging a surcharge.

I've also read folks claiming that the rules prohibit a "chain" (whatever that means) from varying their policy from state to state, thereby precluding a "chain" from charging a surcharge if they operate in a state that prohibits surcharges.

In many cases, they already could advertise cash discounts. The real difference is now they can choose to call them "credit card surcharges" instead of "cash discounts". That said, because of consumer psychology, I would expect that pretty much every retailer which wants to create different pricing would still prefer to call it a "cash discount" because that sounds a lot more consumer-friendly than "credit card surcharge".

Our favorite little Italian restaurant offers 10% cash discount--hope they keep it. I also notice a lot of small shops and cafes take only cash but offer generic atms for customers to use (and I imagine the atm fee income is split between the store owner and the atm owner).

__________________“Would you like an adventure now, or would you like to have your tea first?” J.M. Barrie, Peter Pan

I've read folks claiming that the rules require a store charging a surcharge for Visa and Mastercard also charge a surcharge for AMEX if they accept AMEX, and AMEX, not covered by this agreement, doesn't permit a surcharge, thereby prohibiting those retailers from charging a surcharge.

Does anyone know if either of these are valid statements?

I had read just the opposite. The settlement involved just MC/VISA so others like AMEX/DISCOVER etc would not be subject to the "checkout fees". But don't know if that is fact or not.

Except if web retailers start doing this as well. There are reasons why most retailers wouldn't but I don't think we can say that those who would would necessarily be B&M retailers.

Except that credit card purchases (including debit cards "swiped" like a credit card, which incur the same fees) are probably more than 99% of the business of most online retailers. That segment of the retail space would be slitting its own throat if they charged more for credit card purchases.

__________________"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?"-- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

I had read just the opposite. The settlement involved just MC/VISA so others like AMEX/DISCOVER etc would not be subject to the "checkout fees". But don't know if that is fact or not.

Yes, that's for sure, but what I read is that MC/VISA can still require "me too" - insist that if they're surcharged then AMEX must be too (and of course AMEX won't allow surcharges). It sounded like a massive loop-hole was left in.

If it was already baked into the price, which is certainly possible, how would you ever know.

Every cost of doing business is baked into prices. Credit card fees merchants pay are a cost of doing business.

__________________"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?"-- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

Latest Threads

Social Knowledge Community

About Us

This community was started in 2002 as an alternative to a then fee only Motley Fool. The focus of the discussions is on topics related to early retirement and financial independence. The community is moderated to ensure a pleasant experience for our members.